Dracula Untold Blu-ray ReviewMar 03 2015 01:15 AMDracula Untold games its thrones on Blu-ray with an edition that presents this leaden reboot of the Dracula franchise in solid high definition, with an army... Read More

Finally, TFATH in its originally created aspect ratio. It has always been a little murky what ratio this was actually animated in. The Rescuers was definitely 1.66:1 and pretty much every animated feature coming after TFATH as well, so it always seemed odd that Disney claimed 1.33:1 was the correct ratio for this one.

While I don't give a shit about the sequel (I've studiously avoided all of Disney's direct-to-video "cheapquels"), the original film is one of the better efforts from Disney's post-Jungle Book, pre-Little Mermaid slump, and it's great that we're finally getting a proper widescreen transfer.

Disney Movie Club turned this into a tease. But I correctly guessed what it was.
Don't remember too much of this film. Lately I've been picking up some I missed, like Beauty and the Beast. I guess I'll do the same with this.

The one extra they should do for this film that they never will would be one dealing with the Don Bluth-staged walkout, which happened during this film's production. This era of Disney's history is seldom covered except to talk about the perceived shortcomings of the films made during this era, so it could be an interesting subject for a documentary, like the three they did before.

Finally, TFATH in its originally created aspect ratio. It has always been a little murky what ratio this was actually animated in. The Rescuers was definitely 1.66:1 and pretty much every animated feature coming after TFATH as well, so it always seemed odd that Disney claimed 1.33:1 was the correct ratio for this one.

The instructions for projecting the movie in the pressbook list the aspect ratio at 1.75:1.

I wouldn't know...aside from the first Land Before Time sequel (I know, I know...shame on me), I have deliberately avoided all of the spate of direct-to-video cheapquels pretty much every animated movie EVER MADE has received since the mid-90's. These aren't movies for rational adults...they're for unimaginative eight-year olds to watch while their parents are in the other room doing laundry or something. Total "video babysitter" drek.

Of course, now most animated sequels are released theatrically, because there's more profit to be had there, no matter how bad they eventually get (did we need four fucking Shrek movies? And this is coming from someone who loved the first two).

The one extra they should do for this film that they never will would be one dealing with the Don Bluth-staged walkout, which happened during this film's production. This era of Disney's history is seldom covered except to talk about the perceived shortcomings of the films made during this era, so it could be an interesting subject for a documentary, like the three they did before.

Why would Disney do such a thing? It would make Don Bluth look bad! I'm sure they have nothing against that poor, aging twit. His premonition was that if he walked out of Disney he'd take the magic with him. He didn't.

Why would Disney do such a thing? It would make Don Bluth look bad! I'm sure they have nothing against that poor, aging twit. His premonition was that if he walked out of Disney he'd take the magic with him. He didn't.

I wouldn't classify Bluth as a twit. He was a stickler for technical quality (one of his complaints was being told not to bother filling in the whites of Bernard's eyes in The Rescuers), but he was no businessman, going bankrupt more than once (unlike Walt Disney, he didn't have someone like Roy around with good business sense; God help the studio if Roy had predeceased him), and not half the storyteller Walt was. Well his early works were good (Secret of NIMH, American Tail, Land Before Time), but around the time that Disney rebounded he started to slip (Rock-a-Doodle, anyone?). I imagine some at Disney would like to make him look bad, even if one could argue that having others do theatrical-quality animation forced them to become more competitive (as well as Roy E. Disney doing everything he could to keep Michael Eisner from shutting animation down completely). That they would even make something like Waking Sleeping Beauty in the first place means that they can admit that not all was well all the time in the Magic Kingdom. Still, would any of Bluth's crew cooperate in such a film if it was made by Disney?

When Bluth took his dozen cohorts with him, that was about 10% of the staff, and it pushed back Fox & the Hound by 6 months. Even though Disney did turn out to be more successful in the long run without him, the remaining animators were split about their opinions towards him, split into camps of "Bluthies" and "Mouseketeers".